Radio Flash Slave choices

[chad_hoelzel1]

<p>I am having to make some decisions as to what direction I want to take my photography in regards to lighting. Currently I do some locational portraiture and some weddings (not large scale). My current lights are 2X 550 EX's, one 580 EX II and a Metz 45 CL4 (don't have a large battery pack so I don't use it). I have two Canon battery packs and BVS Pulsar filled with C cells. I also own a Sekonic L-358 I also own enough tripods and a light stands to hold 2 of the Canons and keep one on camera.<br /> What I nead help with is real field experience advice as to what works and what doesn't. I want a system that is fairly easy to use so that I don't need to have to do lots of adjusting.<br /> <br /> <strong>Phase One Purchase (next year or two):</strong> <br /> Radio slaves for current Canon flashes<br /> Option One: One Radio Popper PX Transmitter for on camera flash.... Two Radio Popper PX Receivers for speedlites..... One Radio Popper JrX transmitter for Sekonic meter attached via PC cord.<br /> Option Two: One CyberSync CST attached to camera with PC sync cord and mounted to camera mounted flash (one option)..... Two CyperSync CSR B for speedlites (or a third if I mount the Cybersync CST to hotshoe)...... Once Cybersync CST mounted to Sekonic meter via PC cord</p>

<p><strong>Phase Two Purchase (two years plus from now):</strong> <br /> This will show why the CyberSync Option<br /> Two Einstein 640 Strobes.....two CSXCV Transmitters..... One CyberSync Commander.... One Vagabond II Battery pack system</p>

<p>With the Phase one Option One system I would get the best of both worlds... TTL when I just use the Speedlites by themselves and Manual Flash when using them with the Einstein strobes. The Radio Popper system would have to get attached to the CyberSync system with the Radio Popper JrX transmitter. Then the a Cybersync Commanders Flash meter could replace the Sekonic meter.</p>

<p>I would probably not combine both speedlites and strobes all the time but I would like the option to (ie. locational hair light or light hidden behind veil for wedding formals). If I go with Phase One Option two it would be less integrating when I combine systems but I`d lose TTL.</p>

<p>For those using Speedlites in manual on location how are you finding your work flow. Which would be less of a headache having one radio system while using the speedlites manually or TTL now and having to integrate systems later.</p>

<p> </p>

[picturesque]

<p>I consider all manual less of a headache than trying to use ETTL for multiple lights. When using ETTL, you're going to have to chimp and adjust anyway. Same with all manual flash--chimp and adjust. The fact that you have to walk to adjust is minor to me. I go by my handwritten cheat sheet which I have pasted on the flash, which gets me very close, so many times, I am not walking over to the flash to adjust, just adjusting the f stop or ISO by a third or 2/3 stop. For veil lights I've taken to using a Morris Wide Slave, which is non adjustable. With veil or back lights, you don't have to fine tune the power much anyway. If I really wanted to cut down on the Morris slave, I just put a shower cap diffuser (or 2) on it. I'm afraid my multiple light set up is pretty crude, but it works for me. I use Cybersyncs only.</p>

[chad_hoelzel1]

<p>With Radio Poppers you just adjust things on the on camera flash through (ratios) and that sends the info to the others (TTL). Maybe I need to try using my flashes a bit more to see whether TTL is really effective with more then one flash in regards to control and accuracy before I try going with a wireless TTL system. I've been sort of avoiding it because of the lack of effective range outdoors and having to rotate them around to get line of sight. It sort of hinders creativity so that's why I'm wanting to go Radio wireless.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Chad--yes, the RadioPoppers basically make whatever the Canon wireless system can do better by making the firing consistent and reliable, and extending the range. However, it can't make the actual Canon wireless exposure methods better than they already are, which is to say, not particularly consistent (IMHO). Anyway, it would be a good idea to try out what the Canon wireless system will do for you before considering what priority retention of that system is on your list. I'm not saying don't get them, because some people like it a lot.</p>

<p>By the way, I use my off camera flashes in manual flash mode, with my on camera 580EXII in ETTL. Not supposed to work right, but through flash comp, it works fine.</p>

[chad_hoelzel1]

<p>Thanks for the feedback Nadine... That's exactly what I was wanting to hear... I use my flashes mainly for my two DSLR bodies so haven't used them lots off camera. I'm finding single flash usage to be reasonably consistent but I guess the more complication you add to ETTL the more a small problem can increase to a larger one (Canon's metering inconsistencies). </p>

[acedigital]

<p>Chad, if you haven't already, check out the great off camera lighting blog<br>

www.strobist.com</p>